【The Japan Times】Message from the Executive Editor

 source : 2018.12.06 The Japan Times (クリックで引用記事開閉)

In the Friday Nov. 30 issue of The Japan Times, we published an Editor’s Note on our language regarding “comfort women” and “forced labor.”

Editor’s note: In the past, The Japan Times has used terms that could have been potentially misleading. The term “forced labor” has been used to refer to laborers who were recruited before and during World War II to work for Japanese companies. However, because the conditions they worked under or how these workers were recruited varied, we will henceforth refer to them as “wartime laborers.” Similarly, “comfort women” have been referred to as “women who were forced to provide sex for Japanese troops before and during World War II.” Because the experiences of comfort women in different areas throughout the course of the war varied widely, from today, we will refer to “comfort women” as “women who worked in wartime brothels, including those who did so against their will, to provide sex to Japanese soldiers.”

編集部からのお知らせ： 過去、ジャパンタイムズ紙は、誤解を招く可能性がある表現を用いてきました。第二次世界大戦前と戦中に日本企業に雇用された労働者について、「強制労働」という言葉が使われていました。
しかしながら、労働環境や、雇用の経緯が多様である為、今後はそれらの労働者を「戦時労働者」と表現することにします。
同様に、「慰安婦」は「第二次大戦前と戦中に、日本軍に性行為を強要された女性達」と表現していました。
ですが、慰安婦の経験は戦争中、地域によって大きく異なるため、本日より「慰安婦」を、「自ら望まなかった者も含み、戦時下の娼館で日本兵相手に性行為を提供していた女性達」と表現することにします。

Following multiple discussions on the issue that commenced more than a year ago, the decision to revise our descriptions of these terms was made by myself as executive editor, along with senior editorial managers, in the belief that the change would better reflect a more objective view of topics that are both contentious and difficult to summarize.

Given the complexity, the brief note was insufficient, and therefore led to a number of assumptions about the direction of The Japan Times, which came under new management in June 2017.

For our readers, the change warranted a more detailed and nuanced explanation of our decision. As a media organization, one of our duties is to communicate efficiently and avoid ambiguity. The note failed to do that.

We must acknowledge the fact that the note damaged the relationship of trust that we have developed with our readers, our writers and our staff. For this, we humbly apologize.

Although the note was not intended to signal a change in our overall editorial direction, we realize that this could be misconstrued as the result of political pressure. It pains us, as journalists, that this note has tarnished our reputation as an independent voice, and I categorically deny any accusations that The Japan Times has bowed to external pressure.

The Japan Times has long prided itself on its independence and adherence to the fundamental principles of quality journalism. This will not change.

We are currently engaged in further internal discussions to scrutinize and amend our language regarding these contentious issues. Furthermore, we intend to present our findings and fully clarify our descriptions of these controversial topics in the near future.

To improve as a media organization, it is important for us to listen to all of your voices.

Hiroyasu Mizuno
Executive Editor

Opinion Depressing Pottering Blog Current-Label : Blockquote